On 2015-09-04 21:36:53 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Fri, 04 Sep 2015, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > On 2015-09-04 13:59:02 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > On Fri, 04 Sep 2015, Aron Xu wrote: > > > > I don't want to close it, nor I want make this version to testing, so > > > > please don't lower the severity, as said above. > > > > > > Why don't you want this version into testing? > > > > I'm not the maintainer, but I think that it is probably cleaner to > > have testing version = stable version until this bug is fixed (it > > would be different if testing had already diverged from stable). > > "I think it's cleaner" is a bit light in arguments. > > The stable and testing versions have 3 open security issues. > The unstable one has none.
My argument is that: 1. stable must not have security issues, i.e. all security issues should be fixed ASAP. AFAIK, security issues in stable are generally fixed before unstable. 2. Given (1), if testing version = stable version, it is as easy to fix testing. On the other hand, is it really necessary to have unstable migrate to testing right now? -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
